Mormon church ‘remains committed to political neutrality’ in wake of Trump’s executive order

President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Rose Garden of the of the White House, asking the IRS to use "maximum enforcement discretion" over the regulation, known as Johnson Amendment, which applies to churches and nonprofits, Washington, D.C., May 4, 2017 | AP Photo/Evan Vucci, St. George News

ST. GEORGE – President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday aimed at weakening federal enforcement preventing churches and religiously affiliated, tax-exempt groups from getting too political.

President Donald Trump gestures in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, D.C., before signing an executive order aimed at easing an IRS rule limiting political activity for churches, Washington, D.C., May 4, 2017 | AP Photo/Evan Vucci, St. George News

“This financial threat against the faith community is over,” Trump said. “No one should be censoring sermons or targeting pastors.”

While the executive order aims to weaken enforcement of the policy barring churches and tax-exempt groups from endorsing political candidates, it also promises “regulatory relief” for groups with religious objections to the preventive services requirement in the Affordable Care Act, according to a White House official.

Those requirements include covering birth control and could apply to religious groups that object to paying for contraception.

In Utah, where a majority of the elected legislators are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, church spokesman Eric Hawkins said in an emailed statement Thursday that the church plans to remain politically neutral.

“We are always grateful for the efforts of leaders to safeguard religious freedom and protect the beliefs and religious exercise of all people,” Hawkins said in the email. “As an institution, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been and remains committed to political neutrality. Today’s executive order will not affect that longstanding policy.”

Under the church’s stance of neutrality, it does not endorse political candidates, parties or platforms, or tell church members who they should support or what their party affiliation should be.

Use of church facilities for partisan political purposes is also forbidden.

However, the church does encourage its members to be politically active in their communities and support whichever platforms or candidates they feel best represents them.

Like other religious institutions and affiliated groups, however, the church reserves “the right as an institution to address, in a nonpartisan way, issues that it believes have significant community or moral consequences or that directly affect the interests of the church.”

However, the church’s influence, direct and otherwise, has also been felt in matters of Utah politics in regards to medicinal marijuana, LGBT equality and alcohol policy.

In an interview with Fox 13 news, Utah House Minority Leader Brian King, D-Salt Lake City, said he is worried the executive order is a step toward the integration of church and state. Like the majority of Utah lawmakers, King is also Mormon.

“I’ve got colleagues up here in the House of Representatives that believe there ought to be closer integration of church and state and when I say church, I mean LDS church here in the state of Utah,” he told Fox 13’s Ben Winslow. “I think that’s a problem. To the extent we go down that road, I think it’s unwise. I think it’s bad public policy.”

The amendment Trump’s executive order seemingly challenges, named for then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, was put into force in 1954. The policy allows a wide range of advocacy on political issues, but in the case of houses of worship, it bars electioneering and outright political endorsements from the pulpit.

The IRS does not make public its investigations of such cases, but only one church is known to have lost its tax-exempt status as a result of the prohibition.

The order did not match a broader, much more detailed draft leaked earlier this year that included provisions on conscience protection for faith-based ministries, schools and federal workers across an array of agencies.

Robin Fretwell Wilson, a legal scholar who advises legislators on balancing LGBT rights and religious liberty, told The Associated Press the language in the document was so vague, it was unclear what impact it would have.

That vaguery ultimately led to the American Civil Liberties Union dropping its original threat to sue Trump over the executive order.

“Today’s executive order signing was an elaborate photo-op with no discernible policy outcome,” said Anthony D. Romero, the ACLU’s executive director. “After careful review of the order’s text we have determined that the order does not meaningfully alter the ability of religious institutions or individuals to intervene in the political process. The order portends but does not yet do harm to the provision of reproductive health services.”

While Trump’s action on the Johnson Amendment aims to please religious conservatives, not all of them are on board.

In a February survey of evangelical leaders conducted by the National Association of Evangelicals, which represents churches from about 40 denominations, 89 percent said pastors should not endorse political candidates from the pulpit. Nearly 100 clergy and faith leaders from across a range of denominations sent a letter last month to congressional leaders urging them to uphold the regulation. They said the IRS rule protects houses of worship and religious groups from political pressure.

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!

About the Author

Mori Kessler serves as a Senior Reporter for St. George News, having previously contributed as a writer and Interim Editor in 2011-12, and an assistant editor from 2012 to mid-2014. He began writing news as a freelancer in 2009 for Today in Dixie, and joined the writing staff of St. George News in mid-2010. He is also a shameless nerd and has a bad sense of direction, often telling people go left while he is pointing right.

@ladybug, you seem to know very little about the LDS Church if you think they waiver on beliefs based on politics and popularity. It is exactly because they don’t waiver that everyone seems so upset at them. There are liberals who do not like their stance on marriage; there are conservatives who do not like their stance on immigration reform. So be it. They stand by their moral principles, which is exactly what a church ought to do. They stand up and speak out when they feel those principles are trampled upon. You are correct, they do not and will not endorse a party or president. But they will stand for their beliefs.

Total BS. The Mormon church/corporation waivers on their beliefs and policies based on what will bring in the most cash. It’s a corporation and money making venture first and foremost, and being a church (or cult?) is their secondary priority. I don’t know if the old men who run it publicly came out and endorsed Mittens Romney, but let’s be real–they didn’t have to. Any they’re sneaky. They know how to keep the dirty work behind the scenes.

Hahahaha political neutrality my keister. The morman Church has sunk it’s teeth in to more political menacing it’s hard to swallow any concept of truth from them.
If there were such thing as lucifer, the mormon church is lead by it.

The mormon LDS apparatus is one of the most powerful religious political entities in the nation, if not the most powerful religious political entity. For them to claim they’re neutral on anything is total BS. They’ve had a stranglehold on politics in this state since its inception. They catholics used to be far and away the most powerful, but have since been by the pedophile scandals and inability to retain younger members. The mormon LDS apparatus, I think, is the most powerful political weapon when compared to any other religious group–think Mitt “Mittens” Romney. The mormon LDS power apparatus is in no danger of being “declawed” any time soon.

Let’s see @Rainbowash, moral issue, moral issue, moral issue, moral issue. All within their prerogative as a Church. The fact that you may or may not be amoral, doesn’t mean that the LDS Church should not speak out on issues that are important to them. That political parties make these same issue political is of no consequence. The Church will speak on moral issues as it deems appropriate. And your thinking that the “gay parents” thing is about punishment is absurd. It is about conflicting values. And let me ask, just how big is the line of gay parents wanting to have their children baptized into a church that teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman? You are making an issue of something that is not an issue.

@AnotherReader, It’s clear that you have bought in to Tom Monsons line of BS hook, line and sinker.
Have you ever noticed that your cult only speaks out on ‘moral issues’ when that particular issue is also up for a vote?

“….just how big is the line of gay parents wanting to have their children baptized into a church that teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman?” Obviously it’s big enough that Tom Monson -oops I mean “God”- felt the need to share his opinion.